Prakash Rohidas Koli v. The State Of Maharashtra

2024:BHC-AUG:14828 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 43 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 607 OF 2024 PRAKASH ROHIDAS KOLI

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ...

Mr. R.D. Thorat Advocate for Applicant appointed through Legal Aid.

Ms. P.R. Bharaswadkar, A.P.P. for Respondent - State. ...

CORAM: S.G. MEHARE, J.

DATE : 15th JULY, 2024 ORDER :

1.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the State.

2.

The applicant seeks bail in Crime No.318 of 2023 registered with Nandurbar Taluka Police Station, Nadurbar, Taluka and District-Nandurbar, for the offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

The injured alleged against the applicant that he was in the field with an iron sickle in his hand. When the injured was tying the animals to picket, the applicant came from behind and

assaulted him with the sickle on his neck, head, back, right side ear and lips.

4.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been behind bars for the last six months. Applicant and injured are relatives. Applicant has family responsibilities. The trial may take its time. Hence, he may be granted bail. 5.

Learned APP would submit that the injured has suffered serious injuries of a large size on the vital part of the body. The injuries were grievous. Considering the number of injuries caused to the injured, it could be gathered that the applicant had the sole intention to kill the victim. He had no reason to carry deadly weapon like a sickle in the field. All the injuries match with the first information report as lodged by the injured. The applicant was aggressive. If he is granted bail, he may kill the injured and other witnesses.

6.

Perusal of the record reveals that the argument of the learned APP has substance. Serious injuries were caused to the injured. A deadly weapon like a sickle was used. The applicant was aggressive. The offence is grave. Considering the facts in toto, the Court is of the view that this is not a fit case for bail. Hence, the application stands dismissed.

7.

Since Mr. R.D. Thorat, learned counsel was appointed to prosecute the cause of the applicant, the Secretary, High Court Legal Services, Sub-Committee, Aurangabad do pay the legal fees to learned advocate appointed as per the schedule.

[ S.G. MEHARE, J. ] asb/JULY24